From WXXI news.

This is Connections.

I'm Evan Dawson.

Well, as you know, we've been welcoming candidates who are going to be appearing on your upcoming ballots.

And today we're going to have both the incumbent and the challenger in a race for New York State Assembly.

Jen Lunsford is the Democratic incumbent in district number 135.

Kolenda Washington is the Republican challenger in this race.

This hour, we meet the candidates and discuss the issues.

We're going to welcome your questions.

As always, you can email the program Connections at.

I talk a little housekeeping note.

If you join us tomorrow, we're going to be live on the road at the Little Theater producer Megan Mack.

There's still seats available tomorrow.

Is that correct?

So it's a big theater.

We've got a lot of people registered are going to be in the audience.

But if you want to come attend the show live tomorrow, we're talking about college campuses and the state of mental health on campus.

What schools are doing, whether it's enough too much working or not, and what students are perceiving.

And we would love to have you there.

So it's at the little noon tomorrow.

We'd love to have you there, but please do register and we'll have a link on our website for that.

Let me welcome the candidates for office.

Jen Lunsford and Kalinda Washington are here.

First of all, Kalinda, it's nice to see you in studio.

First time having you.

Thank you very much for making time.

Thank you for having Jen Lunsford.

Welcome back to the program.

Thanks for being here.

Always happy to be here.

The candidates websites calendar.

KalindaforNYSassembly.com.

And Kalinda is with a K. That's her website and it's voteJenlunsford.com.

Yeah.

So we always start by asking the candidates if they'll describe a little bit about their professional background and why they're running.

We'll start with the incumbent.

Jen Lunsford the floor is yours.

Sure.

So I am completing my sixth year in office.

I was elected first in 2020.

Prior to that, I was an attorney for 12 years, focusing on injured and disabled people and helping them access, benefits across many different systems that I now legislate within.

It's made me an expert in a lot of things that we deal with, including Medicaid, no fault.

And last year, the car insurance debate, but I know that, much of what I bring with me is my experience as a member of this community, as a mom and our school district, as a taxpayer, as a person who interacts with all our levels of government.

And also I, at Boston University, I had a health law, focus that has, really served me well as we navigate some of the challenges we're seeing from the federal government this year.

Are we just doing background or are we doing okay?

Good.

Okay.

And why you want to do it for you?

Why you want to stay in?

I'm sure.

So as much as I am incredibly proud of the work that we've done, you know, one of the things I ran on was making childcare more affordable.

And that's something we've absolutely delivered on.

There's still so much more work to do.

And as I look to not just next year, but next month, as many of the federal Medicaid, cuts are to roll out, I know that we need strong advocacy for our hospitals, for our nursing homes, for people with disabilities.

And that's really where I've centered myself over the last six years.

I've become a strong voice on the assistant majority leader.

Now, potentially, open for her chair position for next year.

So this is, an opportunity to really begin to flex their muscles that I've, built up coming to Washington.

A little bit of an introduction for yourself, for our audience.

And then why you decided to run for this seat.

So I'm coming to Washington.

Thank you so much for having me.

I am a mother and educator.

I am a live kidney donor.

I am a product of Harrington, New York.

I grew up there.

My family is there.

I've had an opportunity to see how the community has changed.

And I am ready and willing to be the voice for people to speak to all of the members of our community and to bring a sense of wholesomeness back to the community.

And so it's time for someone to be able to speak up for those who aren't able to be heard right now.

So when you say bring a sense of wholesomeness back to the community, can you describe more of what you mean?

The our communities in 135th district, they're divided.

And, being from Harrington, working in East Rochester, working in Penfield, there wasn't that developed that division before.

So we need to be more inclusive of each other.

We need to stop bickering with one another.

We need to be able to have hard conversations and put our differences aside and do what's best for the people of the community.

Okay.

And can I ask you to give, I probably nobody runs for office if they think the incumbents doing a great job.

And we're glad to have you both together.

I want to say how much I respect both of you for being here together.

Do you have a general critique of what Democrats are doing in Albany that you don't like?

My general catchy.

Excuse me?

My general critique is just the simple fact that people's voices are not being heard.

What makes me, what encourages me with this race is being able to represent everyone.

I don't feel like everyone is being represented fairly within, the state of New York or within the Monroe County.

So what's an example of that?

So an example.

Universal child care.

Let's talk about universal child care okay.

It benefits benefits some.

It doesn't benefit everybody.

So there are not enough, issues that are being handled right now.

The most that I've heard from people is transparency and availability and being able to articulate how funding is taking place and how taxpayer dollars are being used.

So that's what I'm here to do.

I'll get, some member lens for in a moment.

I just want to make sure I fully understand the universal child care complaint.

It's not.

I don't feel like it's fair for everyone.

It's fair for people who, to my knowledge, based upon what I have know now, mind you, I've been a director of a child care three different times.

Okay?

I understand the cost of child care.

I understand that it is vers differently.

According to the location in which the, The child care is set up in the 135th district.

It is extremely high because of the population and the demographics of of people.

I feel that when I talk about fairness, if you were to be in the city of Rochester, yes, the income is a little bit different, but there are more advantages for, there are more advantages for a demographic such as I mentioned in the city, as there would be for residents and 135th district.

My point is that the 135th district normally houses people that have a higher income per se, especially in that district.

So they may not be in need.

But I'm trying to really find a way to create a sense of fairness and balance across the the lines.

So it's too expensive.

I mean, it's so expensive.

In general, child care is expensive.

Okay.

You asked me for a specific.

Yeah, yeah.

You know, I, I appreciate that.

Okay.

Some of them are lunch for you want you want to talk a little about that?

Sure.

So we don't have a universal, child care system.

I wish we did.

And one of the things that I'm really proud of was making sure that Monroe County, got to be one of the three pilots as we try to roll out a pathway to universal child care.

That's $20 million from the state.

And I've been working with our county to try to ensure that we're, maximizing that to increase slots for as many kids as possible.

And one of the things I've really, fought for is, a separate bill that was introduced last year that offers an enhanced rate for students with disabilities, because universal child care is not universal if it does not include our kids with disabilities.

And they are the hardest to place in the 135th district, where childcare does hurt.

And we're exactly the kind of community where parents are choosing between going back to work or caring for their kids, and the lack of slots makes that a choice that many families don't even have the option to make because they can't get in.

One of the things I was able to do last year was provide $400,000 in, statewide grant for, the Eastside YMCA as part of another ESD grant, that luckily, the governor was able to deliver, to expand slots at Eastside in that their beautiful new childcare center.

I'm not sure if you've seen it, but we're hoping that as we move forward and we roll out upscale, that will be able to utilize more of those in community slots as well.

But one of, my proudest accomplishments in my six years in the Assembly, in working with the mom squad, you know, we have many moms in the assembly now, was ensuring that families earning up to $113,000 a year for a family of four, and that's a, you know, a different scale, and it goes up every year, qualify for childcare subsidies.

And that can take a bill of $2,000 a month and turn it into $200 a month, and that's delivering real benefits.

And $113,000 a year for a family of four is exactly who lives in 135th district.

Okay.

Is that something you would support?

I would support that.

But at the same time, it's what she just said that it changes and it changes every year.

So 117,000 for a family of four.

And I believe she just said, what, $2,000?

Can you repeat what you just said?

So 113,000.

And that was just an example, an example based on real experience that I've heard from people where it qualifies you for subsidies.

So the subsidies are paid, on your behalf there.

And actually, Monroe County's eliminated the co-payment.

But we have, provided greater access to people to community childcare at the both the 0 to 3 range, where we really struggle to find slots as well as in three and four, because only some of my districts, the minority of my districts, are offering applications.

So why is the 135th still a child care dessert then?

Oh, because we simply don't have enough, daycare slots.

We don't have enough providers and riders providers.

So what are you doing about that?

Oh, that's a great question.

So in addition to, in the past, we've secured workforce grants that unfortunately didn't make it into the budget last year.

And that was something we really fought for to offer, state subsidies so that, childcare could pay, their teachers more because, you know, childcare is always competing for those four year degrees.

They're competing with our school districts.

But also it's a relatively low paid job for what is a very difficult and emotionally draining work.

And we need to pay our childcare workers commensurate with the work they're doing, which is raising the next generation, which is raising our children.

So finding ways to help, subsidize those costs also to open more in-home daycares, something that we lost and haven't regained from Covid was a fair amount of in-home, smaller group daycares.

And I worked with our, small business association through Brockport to offer a training for anybody interested in, opening a daycare to connect them with resources through the Childcare Council, through SBA, through our office, to help them navigate what is really a tremendous bureaucracy to access those licenses.

Okay.

Anything you want to add there, Kalinda?

My only concern with what she was just mentioning.

As for being an office for six years, childcare, providers have always been underpaid.

There has never there has not been a stronger emphasis.

One of the reasons why childcare is such an issue is because of the high, the ability to find high quality teachers, and the state could have done a much better job in terms of paying those, those teachers, because unlike normal teachers, they don't have regular, they don't have the same, schedule where they may have days off.

Right?

They have to work and extreme an extenuating circumstances.

So when we're talking about this topic, it's something that should always be at the forefront because if you want high quality educators, people who really want to be there, they're going to have to be paid for their services.

And childcare is one of the lowest paying, heart over working areas and the state.

Did you want to know?

That's right.

Okay.

Very good.

So that's a good example of the kind of issue discussion we have on this program.

It's not a debate.

If you're just joining us.

We don't call this a debate.

It's a conversation on the issues with the candidates.

It's Jen Lunsford, the incumbent.

Kalinda Washington, the challenger, and their website to voteJenlunsford.com.

KalindaforNYSassembly.com.

They're running for the seat in district number 135.

What we're going to do now is we're going to take our first break of the hour.

It's very short.

We're going to come right back.

And I already have a couple of emails.

I will read those for the candidates.

And then I've got plenty of other questions that we're going to work through as we talk about, the economy of New York State, as we talk about public safety and a lot more with the candidates in your questions next, support for your public radio station comes from our members and from Mary Kerry Ola center, proud supporter of Connections with Evan Dawson, believing an informed and engaged community is a connected one.

Mary Carey, ola.org and Rochester Hearing and Speech Center, serving the region for over 100 years.

Supporting hearing health from newborns to seniors.

Providing audiology, testing and treatment options to help people stay connected to the sounds of everyday life.

More@rhc.org.

Our college's doing enough to support students struggling with mental health.

I'm Evan Dawson.

On Thursday, October 22nd, Connections is leaving the studio and you're invited to join us at noon at the Little Theater for a live conversation about mental health on college campuses, what's working, what isn't, and what students say they need.

Come be part of the conversation.

Reserve your seat at WXXI news.org connections.

This is Connections.

I'm Evan Dawson, okay, some emails here.

Charlie writes in to say thank you, Kalinda and Jen, for agreeing to discuss the issues on Connections.

I wish all the candidates had the courage and dignity to appear together.

Hey, man.

Amen.

Thank you.

Charlie.

Thank you to the candidates.

Much respect, for them being here together today.

Greg seems to send this email every time we've got candidates on top.

Greg wants to know what kind of Democrat, what kind of Republican we have.

So I'll start with his question for the incumbent.

Are you a DSA Democrat?

Greg wants to know, I am not I consider myself to be a practical progressive.

I share a lot of progressive values, but I am laden with this law degree where I just understand how things work.

And it makes me, a very practical person that believes in incremental progress.

And I think a lot of the differences between me and my colleagues who are further left isn't necessarily where we see, the importance of certain issues, but rather in how we want to get there.

When you say you're a practical Democrat, you're implying that DSA is impractical.

I think they are maximalists by philosophy and want everything because they want the system to work and doing it, you know, whole hog would make a cohesive system.

I appreciate that we exist in an ecosystem and that you, even with the best of intentions, can often end up disrupting systems that the people you're trying to help rely on while trying to fix it.

So I will take whatever gains I can get that make life a little bit better for people.

Are you a capitalist?

I am a capitalist in general, but I'm a compassionate capitalist.

I don't believe in capitalism.

But you're not a democratic socialist.

I am not a democratic socialist.

And they will tell you so.

Okay, Greg, thank you for the email.

Greg wants to know.

Kalinda, are you do you consider yourself a Trump Republican or a Maga Republicans?

I'm just a Republican.

I believe in, God first, family second.

And then my country.

Okay, I am an educator.

And.

I believe in my own personal that morals and values.

I don't want to align them with, another face, because I believe that this election is really about voting on the person and not about the party.

Do you think the MAGA movement's been good for the country?

I don't think that any type of movement at that level has been good for the country.

I think that anything, on a federal level really right now has caused a lot of division within our community.

Did you vote for this president?

Yes, at one point I did.

Okay, but that implies maybe not.

Most recently, I did not vote in the election.

The last election I did not just weren't satisfied with the candidate.

I wasn't satisfied with life.

And so I didn't vote.

I, I just didn't happen to, to do it at that point in time.

Okay.

Greg, thank you for the question.

We'll get back to questions from the audience a little bit later in the hour.

It's connections@wxxi.org.

Miss Washington, on your website, you talk about safer communities and you talk about wanting to repeal bail reform and to not only back police, but to get tougher on repeat offenders.

Tell me about that.

I think that we need to, work together again as I am across both party lines to be able to, use some common sense.

So one of the things when we're talking about repeated offenders, we have seen that in our headlines, in the news that instances have happened and that someone may have just gotten out and then they get out again.

That's part of the reason why I am definitely support and support of panel means Protect act, where it is in New York state Senator.

Yeah, I yes, yeah.

And, just I'm hoping that that's able to come to terms because it gives judges the opportunity to hold repeated offenders and they get to determine if they are, if they are safe enough to themselves or to the community to be released back out into the community.

I believe it is until at least until they're seen by a judge, giving ownership and power back to our judges.

I think it's important that they can look at things case by case, scenario wise.

And that should help bring some of the things down.

Okay.

Do you support that, bill?

I do not I think part of that bill is unconstitutional, but also it's redundant.

You know, this rhetoric that we hear around bail reform, which conflates repeated offenders who are people who are rearrested while awaiting trial for a similar crime.

Say you're awaiting trial on a petty larceny, and then you come in another petty larceny, or people who have served their sentence and are out on parole or who have served their time and then, find that offend again, those two things are conflated.

And bail has nothing to do with people who are out on the other side.

Bail is only a front end issue.

I will address both sides on the front end.

We have changed bail reform.

We have amended it three times.

It does absolutely everything the Protect act wants it to do.

Now repeat offenders can be held.

Appearance tickets are only given on a very small number of nonviolent, offenses and be misdemeanors and misdemeanors.

All nonviolent felonies were never included.

All, violent felonies were, excluded from the original bail reform law in 2020.

But further, the list of issues judges can consider when determining how to secure someone is so long that my DSA, colleagues are calling it an effective dangerousness standard.

We have already given judges all of the tools they need, and that is why they have not come back to us for the last three years on bail, because we gave them what they were asking for.

We gave them and the DA's what they were asking for on the back end.

I was not a supporter of the less is more bill, which, broadened the, rules around what could return someone out on parole back into custody because I felt like it was overbroad.

And I think, unfortunately, my concerns around that bill were proven true.

I actually do carry a bill to, amend that and to fix some of the issues that I see.

What would you specifically change then?

There is a, section of my bill that deals with a class of crimes, but more so the less is more.

Bill did not allow for return to custody for people who were repeatedly absconding.

So people who were not showing up to their parole hearings on a repeated basis.

And I understand why, the advocates felt that was important, because when you look at why people are being, returned, it'll say they missed one parole appointment.

They'll say, oh, I missed the bus, or they were late to court.

But what I think many people don't appreciate is that the list that people are looking at or what was pled to and not necessarily what actually occurred, so that is why I support some amendments to that, to give our, judges more discretion when someone is not succeeding on parole.

Okay.

And let me just ask you in general about some of the I think what Kalinda is describing is a general feeling that I hear sometimes from it typically comes from the political right, but not always that the current scenario in this state is number one.

The law is so lenient that it is, that young people are just incentivized to commit crime or they're don't they don't fear the consequences of crime.

We heard that a lot when there were a lot of car thefts, particularly in Hyundai.

And then the other idea that I think Linda raised, which is that, well, people are are being arrested, but then they go right back to the community and then they commit more crimes.

And there it's just this ongoing cycle and there's no real penalty.

So do you think that those perceptions are fair?

I don't think those are fair.

And those are also two different issues because, youthful offenders will we'll put aside the Jed's programs and very successful there.

Being held pretrial is in a consequence.

People are innocent until proven guilty.

And you don't give people consequences before they have been convicted.

And I think that that's a common philosophical misconception people have.

People are held before trial because they're a flight risk, and under this new standard, because they are not succeeding under this new standard that we created in 23, judges can consider what you've been charged with, what your prior charges are.

Did you have a gun, or do you have a temporary restraining order?

Any number of those factors in deciding what kind of securing order you get?

And that may be cash bail.

That may be an ankle monitor.

We actually don't have enough ankle monitors in our county.

As an aside, we don't as in, like, we physically we don't have enough of.

Why not?

I don't know, great question.

Someone should ask me for money for it.

And when you consider the fact that year over year since the Covid summer crime has gone down, crime is at pre-COVID rates.

That's right.

We have given so much funding to the city of Rochester and our, county sheriff in give funding, gun involved violence funding.

We have reduced homicide and shooting events to the lowest rate they've been in over ten years.

We are seeing decreases in crime on almost every sector.

One of the very unfortunate areas we are not making enough progress in is domestic violence.

And that's why I've been centering that in my work in the legislature, why I host a roundtable every year with, Malik Evans to narrow down what we can do to address those issues.

But the idea that crime is out of control is just not borne out by the stats.

Okay.

Do you want to add to that?

I absolutely do.

I advocate for domestic violence for sure.

I have.

I don't know, it sounds very contradicting to me.

I don't understand how we can, support.

I understand the terminology.

We don't need to have a vocabulary lesson on what each term means and how it's implied.

My, in terms of that, the district that is being represented for the 135th district since domestic violence has come up, it takes repeated amounts of times to be to have the police called, to have anything, to have any sort of action even be taken.

Okay.

Someone has to physically be harmed.

That shouldn't be the case.

There should be other instances, like mental health, that should be taken into consideration.

My concern is that when we're talking about, safety, I'm concerned about the safety within the 135th district.

We all know that the city of Rochester has its own fair share of issues, but there has been a an increase for people with vandalism where they have to pay for those costs.

There has been, a lot of theft that people are concerned about that they may not normally have had to worry about living in the 135th district.

So I just wanted to add that piece.

And we absolutely do need to do more for domestic violence survivors because there's not enough being done.

Okay.

And so let me ask both of you about a high profile investigation that's happening now.

It's got the nation's attention out of Cornell.

I'll start with you, Ms.. Washington.

Let me start just by asking you if you think that investigation, from what you've seen so far, has been well handled, and if you have a general thought on the lessons from your understanding of the facts, that case, I don't think that it was handled very well.

I believe that, especially as an educator, this is one of the things that I have to do on a day to day basis.

Anytime there's a situation, you have to be able to, evaluate all of that, all of the circumstances before you formulate an opinion.

And I don't believe that that was done thoroughly enough.

So I think that that's one of the things that we can see on a, a national level that before we jump to any conclusions that we need to make sure that we are doing, adequate research to speak on or to stand by, the decisions that we're making.

Let me just clarify.

So I want to know if this is what you're talking about.

So both governor Hochul, Governor Hochul, during her debate with Bruce Blakeman, said it was a brutal assault there.

And Letitia James, the attorney general, has talked about victims in the case and has had used very strong language, implying that she has an idea in her mind about possible guilt, culpability, etc.. Is that what you're talking about?

That is what I'm talking.

So you think those are out of line?

I believe that you have to be before you formulate any your opinion.

And this is something that I'm learning because this is the first time that I've ran for anything.

I'm not just going to speak out the side of my neck.

I'm going to have to be able to collect as much information to be able to formulate an opinion on an issue, and, in this particular case, it seems like the cart was put before the horse.

Okay, then, separate to that, from what you understand about the case, do you think there are lessons that you want us all to be drawing from?

Yes.

Okay.

I believe that there's been, we need to make stronger legislations about, being under the influence when these type of it, these type of issues come up.

I know that that has been, I believe it's been lingering a little bit on the legislation floor.

About voluntary intoxication, I think is what your time.

That's the idea again, I'm not an attorney.

There's the community there, okay?

Not an attorney.

I'm not a politician.

But the idea is if you are voluntarily getting drunk or getting high, in other words, someone's not slipping something on you.

You're making a choice to to to drink to excess or to take drugs that that might in a legal sense, it might lessen or eliminate your ability to claim, that you were assaulted, that you chose to be in a state that you can't just say, well, they were too drunk or too high to consent because you chose to put yourself in that state.

What do you think the law should say about that?

This is a very sensitive subject and it's one that I'm still trying to to figure out because I believe that, you can say there's going to be, an opinion based upon whichever way you take it.

Right?

I believe that it's something that definitely needs to be revisited on the legislation for, especially with this being such a high.

But you want more time to kind of study it.

I would like more time to study the that.

Okay.

Yeah.

Fair enough.

Do you have an opinion on, first of all, voluntary intoxication?

No.

We'll talk.

Cornell, you'll be surprised to learn I have a very strong opinion on this as, both an attorney and an elected official.

I was not a criminal attorney, and I do need to do my disclaimer that I am part of the working group that is working, not just on the voluntary intoxication rule, but broader rules.

And what I say today is my opinion and not the opinion of the working group.

The working group has form no opinions.

So what you hear from me today is, elected official candidate Jen Lunsford.

I personally support repealing the voluntary intoxication defense, which just to frame that a little bit more clearly, in New York, there is a defense that a defendant can assert that says that this person claims that they were raped because they could not consent due to intoxication.

However, they became intoxicated of their own accord.

Therefore, that excuse for lack of consent does not apply to them.

There is then a rebuttal to that, and when people look at the plain language of the statute and not the rest of the statute, the rest of the section as well as the case law around it, they stop there and they think that voluntary intoxication is a bar to prosecution.

It absolutely is not.

And cases are tried all the time successfully where there's voluntary intoxication.

But many DA's view this as a practical struggle that prevents them from pursuing cases.

The rebuttal to that is I was physically helpless.

I was so inebriated that I was unconscious or otherwise unable to physically, express unwillingness to the act.

So I support fully repealing the voluntary intoxication defense.

It should not apply.

We should deal with these issues case by case.

I don't care how you became intoxicated.

I care what your mental state was when you were determining whether or not you consented to this activity.

A whole conversation for another day.

I will happily come back.

It is because if two people are both just hammered, are they both unable to consent?

So I am not a co-sponsor of a 101, which is the bill that, advocates are pushing right now?

Not because I don't support eliminating the defense, I do, but because the standard that that bill replaces the defense with creates ambiguity in exactly the scenario you're talking about, where it puts the onus on the defendant to somehow know the mental state of the person they are interacting with, not just that they are intoxicated or that they are under the influence, but what their capacity to make decisions is.

And I just don't understand from a practical standpoint how you apply that in court, especially if the other person is inebriated.

We're going to try to talk more about that next Tuesday on this program, but for now, in general, do you think the governor and the attorney general were out of line in their comments about this?

No, because the title nine office at Cornell ultimately did find enough culpability to expel some of these people.

Further, much of the evidence that we've seen come out indicates to me that under our current law, both under the voluntary intoxication rebuttal, under other sections of penal law 130 under human trafficking laws, because this poor woman was farmed out on a text message that there was absolutely sufficient information available to the police, to the district attorney, to campus police, to pursue the investigation further and to bring charges under the law as it is today, I would be blaming the voluntary intoxication statute, too, if I had boned that investigation as hard as these guys did, it is an absolute atrocity.

Okay, so that's where the candidates stand on that issue.

After we take this final break of the hour, we're going to come back and talk about a number of other issues that you the listeners have brought up.

We'll take some more of your questions at Connections.

A cyborg, once again, the candidates who are joining us this hour would love for you to see their websites where you can learn more about them.

Kalinda Washington is the Republican in the race for New York State Assembly, district number 135.

It's Kalinda with the K KalindaforNYSassembly.com.

Jen Lunsford is the Democrat.

The incumbent voteJenlunsford.com.

We're coming right back.

Support for your public radio station comes from our members and from Bob Johnson Auto Group.

Believing an informed public makes for a stronger community.

Proud supporter of Connections with Evan Dawson focused on the news, issues and trends that shape the lives of listeners in the Rochester and Finger Lakes regions.

BobJohnsonAutoGroup.com and two Point Capital Management, proud supporter of WXXI Public Media, believing that local journalism, music and the arts foster connection and community two Point Capital Management life opens up.

This election season, get candidate profiles, conversations, and election information from WXXI news.

Know before you vote.

Find it all at WXXI News Talk.

Okay, this is Connections.

Let's get back to your emails here.

Two from Alex.

First of all, Alex is responding to some of the comments earlier about, well, I just read his email and we'll we'll briefly let our guests jump in on this, and then I'll read his main comment that he had there.

Alex says the failure of Rochester police to address repeated calls to the same address as your guest talked about would imply that the current method of policing is ineffective.

Maybe they should carve out duties to other city departments like animal Services did.

If they can't recruit or keep staff.

What do you make of that?

Kalinda Washington I agree with that.

I think that it especially when it comes to, domestic violence, someone shouldn't have to call the police that often in order for something to happen.

So I, I agree with the caller.

Okay.

Yeah, I, I agree, I think also, you know, using our fit team and, better accessing, community resources.

Not every 901 called needs a police solution.

And one of the things that was discussed at the most recent roundtable, we had, what was it last week?

I think, was that sometimes victims are calling 911 not because they want a criminal charge, but because they need other kinds of supports and they just don't know where to go.

So getting people more information about access to various services is important.

All right, Alex, I promise I will find your initial email, which I'm scrolling to, and I, I meant to get to I would have I will find that in a second.

For now, let me get Denis is he's asking and he's directing this to call in to Washington and he's asking, can you go to Albany and get taxes cut?

That's what Denis wants to know.

That's the question.

Everyone wants their taxes cut.

New York State does have some of the highest taxes.

What I can do is I can, go and reassess and determine if there are places where we can cut, taxes.

I do believe that one of the places that we should be able to cut taxes is for, like, school taxes.

But that's still something that I would have to look into because I don't know the ins and outs of the budget, but I definitely will do my best and advocate for the people.

Okay, well, we don't levy school taxes or property taxes, so we can't directly cut them.

But one of the things that we do, I mean, I was, part of the vote that lowered our, personal income tax rate to the lowest it's been in 70 years.

I've provided, opportunities.

So at the state level, because we don't levy many of these taxes, what we can do is call the enabling legislation where because we're a home state, this is how we have to constitutionally do it.

I can give a municipality permission to issue certain kinds of property tax reductions, like, for example, we increased the amount that municipalities can offer to seniors and people with disability on, their home assessment to reduce their property tax burden.

I have all worked with our county to offer a property tax.

Break to volunteer first responders, which the governor actually just quadrupled the other day in another bill, that we passed at the end of session.

But I think fully funding foundation aid is the best way that we can address our school taxes, because the more support I can give you in state dollars, the less the burden is on our school districts to have to raise the gap from taxes.

Okay, Dennis, thank you for the email.

Here's Alex's other email he said he had emailed when, Assembly member Harry Brunson was on the program about the same subject.

And he says it's this following the midterms, the general expectation is somewhere between an embarrassing and a generationally crushing defeat for Republicans nationwide.

This is Alex's view.

What sort of progressive, rich items do you and the Rochester block see as legitimate targets in the next legislative session, assuming a strong mandate from voters?

So I think continuing the work we're doing on universal child care, you know, we're already on a path towards that.

We're talking a lot about the structure of it between both, or CVS and, where we'd have to partner as, children agent to, Duke, finding a path towards making that a reality for every New Yorker.

I think that is a realistic goal.

Health care is the name of the game, though.

I mean, everyone wants the New York Health Act.

It's extremely expensive.

It's very hard to, pay for that first day.

But we need to figure out ways to address the crushing cost, not just of health insurance to individuals, but to our municipalities, because the number one complaint I am hearing from my towns, my villages, my counties, my school districts, my not for profits is the cost of their health insurance.

It is untenable.

And when you put a cap on how much, municipalities and school districts can raise taxes, we have a 2% tax cap.

They can't just make up for that.

So what happens?

They end up having to cut services.

They end up having to cut programing.

So finding ways to address the crushing cost of health care has to be one of our top priorities.

Okay, but you're in office now.

So New York Health act yes or no?

I am a co-sponsor of the New York Health Act.

You still are, I am.

I recognize the practical challenges around it.

However, I'm starting to feel it nationally, a cracking of the ice on some of these issues where people are really getting fed up.

And one of the big barriers to enacting the New York Health Act is the fact that we would need federal waivers in order to, turn our Medicaid dollars into money that could be used for this program.

And certainly the administration currently in the white House would not give us away.

But let me reframe this thing, because what you're saying is you're a co-sponsor of a single payer New York State health care system, but you recognize that practically that may not pass and that may have its own challenges.

So apart from that, are there tangible steps that could be passed in the next year to bring down the cost of health care?

So one of the things that we're working on with the reductions that are coming in Medicaid, we can't replace those dollar for dollar.

And that's something we just have to admit to that.

It's a it's $91 billion of our budget, Medicaid.

And the ramifications of what's going to happen from the H.R.

one roll out that starts right after the election, is going to be devastating to our health care system.

But something that I have been really prioritizing is more investments in oral health, in particular in our academic dental centers that serve the most at risk people, people who need general anesthesia just for cleanings.

Our Medicaid population just here in Monroe County, the Eastman Institute of Oral health serves 55 counties, has a 36,000 person waitlist that takes three years to get off of, and then people on that waitlist end up in our emergency rooms with preventable dental emergencies.

So I was advocating last year for a medicaid rate increase just for our academic dental centers to help alleviate the burden on this particular population, as well as a, capital improvement for Iowa that will continue to advocate for this year.

All right.

I don't know many Republicans who are for single payer health care at the state level, but I'll ask if you are, first of all.

That's another topic that I'm going to have to look into.

Okay.

Okay.

Do you think there are things that could be done to impact the cost of health care for?

I think, yes.

Because, as someone who contributes to the state, I believe that, there has to be a way where we can.

And I'm not necessarily sure if there is.

There has to be a way that we can reallocate money to make things a lot more affordable for New York State residents.

We there are people that are, in this in this state right now and in the country.

And somehow or another, they have the ability to receive free health care and free, housing and free childcare.

And that's not fair to hardworking citizens that pay in to the system.

When you think about how much comes out of your check for health care alone, just for an individual who may not be from the state or may be a resident from this state, or is who is here illegally and is able to receive better benefits than the actual citizens of this state.

It's pretty.

It's pretty devastating.

So let me reframe Alex's question for your opponent in a different way for you, because I, I presume, Alex, tell me if I'm wrong, that he's on the political left and he thinks, hey, this is going to be a very good election for Democrats nationally.

And he's hoping Democrats will be aggressive in moving toward legislation and various actions come 2027.

Do you think the state is, in your view, in general, just too far left?

Yes.

And what does that mean?

It means that.

My opinion, my personal opinion is that this state is catering to, a certain percentage of people.

They are catering, not to everyone.

So for instance, this whole gestational and non gestational law, when we're talking about the term mother and father, which I know that was supposed to be on, Kathy Hall's desk, you know, to sign.

That's not fair to everyone in this state that only services a certain group of people.

And that's not taken into consideration.

I don't understand how something of of that nature would even make it all the way to the forefront.

There's not enough balance.

So, yes, I do feel like there's not enough balance in this state.

I don't believe that all residents of the state of New York are being heard.

I believe that they're talking.

I don't believe that they're being heard.

So so let me just to extend that point, then I'll let, Assemblymember Lunsford respond.

So, I think related to some of what you said, correct me if I'm wrong, but I wanted to ask you anyway about I want to ask both of you about reproductive rights.

Do you have as a plank on your website here?

And I was almost made about ten years ago.

I might have been 12 years ago, might have been 2014, that Rob Astorino was the candidate for governor for Republicans.

And on this program probably 12 years ago.

That's how elections work in the state.

It's every four years.

That's a new thing.

So I asked him about abortion 12 years ago, and he said, Evan Roe v Wade is the law of the land.

Like, why are you even asking me?

What is the point of this question?

You know, Republicans are not going to overturn abortion rights.

And we're certainly not going to change anything in New York State.

Well, it turned out that we all know what happened with Dobbs, and now it is up to the States.

And so, talk to me a little bit about Kalinda Washington.

Talk to me a little about reproductive health care.

And, if you're not only elected, but if if you see a governing majority, an opportunity, what would you like to see become the law in New York State with reproductive health care and abortion?

Well, what I would like to see and what's what the possibility of it happening.

Well, I understand that.

But, you know, Rob Astorino told me one day there's no possibility of Roe v Wade being overturned, and here we are.

So we might as well just talk about it.

That's true.

I mean, I believe that, abortion is a very sensitive topic, especially, for, for all, for everyone that's involved and the, and it, I myself, I am pro-life with exceptions and I believe that.

And we need to make some changes and we need to look at things case by case scenario.

I don't believe that abortion should be an effective method for birth control.

I think that we need to make stronger, We need to make stronger decisions so that.

We can, I want to be able to reach all different types of women and and take all of their.

I'll.

Every situation is different.

Every circumstance is different.

And I think that all of those should be taken into consideration because it is such a sensitive matter.

I do believe that it should be looked at.

Okay.

But if you could, if there were, we've had a Republican governor in the past, if we see, a real change in Albany, not impossible.

Abortion would be in this state if you could have you the way you would want it.

Generally illegal, with some exceptions, with some exceptions.

Yes.

Exceptions.

For example, rape, incest.

Okay.

If the if the pregnancy is going to cause harm to the mother.

Okay.

So but outside of that, no abortion access, it would have to be, Yes.

That's how I feel.

Okay.

Assembly member Lunsford fundamentally disagree.

I am staunchly, pro-choice.

I have been a strong reproductive justice advocate both in office and before.

Many people know my record from, when I was an attorney, I worked for a reproductive justice organization.

I, voted for and advocated for all of our reproductive justice laws.

I voted yes on every one that has come across my desk, which I think represents the majority of the feelings of the people of 135.

I will also say that the best way to reduce unwanted pregnancy is to provide health care and housing and benefits to people who may be on the list.

My opponent listed earlier of people she doesn't think are deserving of it.

I didn't say that they weren't deserving of it.

You suggested that some people were taking well, they are, and actually, I'm a public teacher and I have I have parents actually, that run from house to house.

So we can go there too, because I didn't say that they weren't deserving of it.

I'm a resident of this state.

I pay into this state just like you do.

How you find that it's okay and fair for someone who, is illegally from another country to come in here and receive services.

More so than the constituents that you represent, is what's questionable to me.

Nobody who is in our country undocumented receives Medicaid.

Is that right?

Yes.

You can prove that.

Yes.

Okay.

I don't think that that's true.

Okay.

You can prove that as well.

Okay.

Not a problem.

We can do that.

Okay.

I'm.

Look, I'm just saying you made a comment earlier and you made a lot of comments.

Hold on.

Let me just read for a second here.

What was the comment, Assembly Member Lunsford, that you heard that that that bothered you when we were discussing, how to reduce health care costs?

The suggestion was, is that there are people who are receiving benefits who should not be receiving benefits.

She mentioned illegal, residents.

That was her term.

Yes.

Because, between 2022 and 2024, New York state has spent $4.5 billion on, asylum seekers.

Yes, I did say that legal residents, asylum seekers are here.

However you want to title it, they're still receiving better services than the people that live in this state.

I have spoken with several people, but I have spoken to several people.

I've spoken to several people that have such difficulty on receiving health care that I have received, receiving services from the state.

But then you have people that are undocumented.

We there's factual information of that because of the way New York State has considered to be asylum.

Okay.

And they do not receive they have to struggle.

They struggle, and they have to fight to receive the same type of services.

So that is factual.

People in the 135th district.

Okay, I have from who I have spoken to people who are struggling, they don't think that it's fair.

All right.

So we're down to a couple minutes.

But let me just make sure that we we have clarity on this.

So two things.

One for each of you.

First, Miss Washington, there is a difference between an asylum seeker who is making a legal claim and that is going through an adjudication process.

Okay, versus someone who crosses a border with no asylum claim and is is not here under the same circumstances.

Okay.

Right.

That's correct.

But do you feel that there should be no distinction in the law between those groups?

I didn't say that either.

I'm just asking.

I want to make sure I don't.

I don't necessarily know if there should be a distinction between the two groups, but I believe that societally, that's how people think of it.

So.

Well.

But but there is a okay, so for an asylum seeker who is someone who is potentially fleeing a very dangerous or personal or political situation, making the claim, waiting for it to be adjudicated should they get any services from New York State.

I didn't say, sure, they can receive services, but I'm asking.

But they they shouldn't have to be able to receive more services than the people who live here.

Okay, so that's this one I want to ask you, do you think asylum seekers are getting it better than New York State residents?

So your opponent is saying, look, they've got a better than than the permanent residents of New York.

135 do you think that's true?

No, because there are millions and millions of New York State residents who asylum seekers also are.

But that's besides the point.

Who received the exact same health care benefits and more, who have better access to, programing and, services through counties and localities.

But I think what my opponent is trying to say, please don't speak for me.

Okay, fine.

What I'm trying to say then, is that there is a group of people just above the line, and this is what many people on 135th district do live every day.

And this is one of the things that I bring up in these conversations in the assembly, that there is a point where you're doing well enough that you don't qualify for benefits, but you're not doing well enough to feel successful and to feel safe and to feel secure.

And that group of to have some.

That's who I really speak to, and that's who I think really needs a strong voice.

So I do think this is an issue of clear disagreement.

And I because those aren't the people of her district, but yes.

Okay.

I appreciate both of you being here.

There was plenty of places we did have agreement on some of the issues, plenty of places of disagreement.

That's why we're here, having a conversation and I want to thank the candidates for taking the time to come in.

The websites Kalinda with theK, KalindaforNYSassembly.com.

The Republican in the race.

Thank you for being here.

Thank you for having me.

Jen Lunsford voteJenlunsford.com the Democrat in the race.

Thank you for being here.

Happy to do it.

Tomorrow we are live at the little theater and we want to see you there.

Go to our website register.

Being the crowd, we're talking about mental health on college campuses.

Until then, thanks for everyone here at Connections.

This program is a production of WXXI Public Radio.

The views expressed do not necessarily represent those of this station, its staff, management, or underwriters.

The broadcast is meant for the private use of our audience.

Any rebroadcast or use in another medium without expressed written consent of WXXI is strictly prohibited.

Connections with Evan Dawson is available as a podcast.

Just click on the Connections link.

At WXXI news.

Dot org.